Back in July, Judge Denise Cote found Apple guilty of colluding with publishers to raise e-book prices. A damages trial was set to follow.
Apple vehemently denied the charges saying, "Apple did not conspire to fix ebook pricing and we will continue to fight against these false accusations. When we introduced the iBookstore in 2010, we gave customers more choice, injecting much needed innovation and competition into the market, breaking Amazon’s monopolistic grip on the publishing industry. We’ve done nothing wrong and we will appeal the judge’s decision."
To avoid a damages trial, Apple negotiated a conditional $450 million dollar settlement; however, the settlement is conditioned on the outcome of its appeal.
Judge Cote has now approved what she calls a "highly unusual" accord saying it is "unusually structured settlement, especially for one arrived at on the eve of trial."
Apple and Judge Cote have butted heads numerous times through this case. Cote's been accused of ruling before hearing the evidence after she pre-declared a "tentative view" that Apple was an antitrust violator before trial. She also allegedly appointed her friend an external monitor over Apple and granted him 'excessive inquisitorial powers' leading the WSJ to publish an article blasting the judge, calling her a 'disgrace to the judiciary'.
A federal appeals court is scheduled to hear Apple's appeal on December 15th.